In short, the Coalition’s telecommunications expertise was out in force — in a venue in which they would usually be out for blood.

However, curiously, the session never grew that heated.

The last several times Quigley had appeared before in such a venue — in the NBN and Senate Estimates committee meetings held throughout May and June — the Coalition had let loose its attack dogs in full swing. Like a pack of oversized dire-wolves, Turnbull and his colleagues had bared their fangs and lunged for Quigley’s jugular while simultaneously trying to slice his hamstrings, in vicious attacks on the executive’s personal credibility which have variously been labelled “a smear campaign”, “McCarthyism”, “a witch hunt”, “Godwin Grech re-visited” and worse.

I speak, of course, of the Coalition’s relentless pursuit of Quigley over his previous employment at French networking giant Alcatel-Lucent, and the tenuous links which some are drawing between the executive’s time there and allegations of corruption and bribery in Alcatel’s division covering Central American country Costa Rica.

Now, I’ve sat through hundreds of parliamentary sessions in my time as a journalist; I’ve attended dozens of Ministerial and Opposition press conferences; I’ve seen the worst that Australian politicians can do in public discourse. But the Coalition’s hounding of Quigley over the Alcatel-Lucent matter achieved a new low, in my opinion. Turnbull and his brigade have believed they were so close on the scent of Quigley’s downfall that they failed to see what a disgrace they had become during the chase.

And yet in this most recent of sessions, last week, it was as though these ferocious beasts of democracy had turned into a bunch of mewling kittens.

If you search through the session transcript (PDF), you will find no mention of Alcatel-Lucent. Shockingly, the Coalition allowed Quigley a lengthy opening statement on other issues, before proceeding to ask him a series of polite and insightful questions about the actual matter at hand: The practicalities of how the National Broadband Network is being rolled out.

A mild-manned Luke Hartsuyker questioned the NBN Co chief about its new construction contracts and the price of labour, followed by some more pressing queries about the difference between NBN Co’s respective deals with Telstra and Optus. Mary Jo Fisher swapped her caustic tongue for a gentle smile and followed up Hartsuyker’s interest with some clarifications about post-tax valuations, as well as discussing NBN Co’s union agreements. Fletcher went a bit further than his colleagues, and put Quigley in the hot seat for a while over the Optus deal — but it is evident that Quigley was able to get his answers out in a reasonable manner without being boiled alive as he had been during previous sessions.

Out of the entire Opposition cohort, it was only Turnbull himself that pushed Quigley into being slightly uncomfortable — but again the question of Alcatel-Lucent was left off the table. Turnbull mainly appeared to be interested in comparing Korea’s broadband situation with Australia’s own, pinioning Quigley on the matter of end user pricing and what the impact of competition was on the respective markets.

This sudden turnaround by the Opposition on the matter of Quigley’s Alcatel-Lucent past is simply remarkable.

We are talking about half a dozen senior politicians who have been hounding the NBN Co chief executive on this contentious matter for the past six months. As early as December last year, Turnbull was demanding answers from Quigley over the issue, stating that the executive and his offsider, NBN Co CFO Jean-Pascal Beaufret, had a responsibility to give Australians “a detailed explanation”.

At every opportunity since that time, Turnbull and his colleagues have stuck the boot into Quigley on the matter, with several parliamentary sessions over the past several months erupting in furore after Quigley had endured several hours of close questioning.

There have been countless newspaper articles on the matter written over the past six months, hundreds of TV reports displaying the Coalition’s bombastic rhetoric to full effect, dozens of radio interviews in which Turnbull has reiterated his view of Quigley’s involvement in the Costa Rica scandal, and no doubt, thousands of phone calls to NBN Co’s besieged press team, which has likely had to issue the same statement on the matter denying any guilt on Quigley’s part daily for months on end.

To think that the Coalition would simply abandon this high-profile line of questioning for — shock! — valid questions about NBN Co’s current operations is a move which I think few would have expected. The ongoing nature of the personal attack on Quigley has been so strong that many of us had come to take it for granted; whenever the Coalition faced the NBN Co chief, the long knives would come out.

That the personal attacks on Quigley have died down over the past week signifies one thing: For now, the Coalition appears to have called a halt to them. For the Alcatel-Lucent issue not to have been mentioned at all during this most recent session indicates that the Coalition in general, and Turnbull in particular as the NBN policy leader, has recognised that there is not enough ammunition for now to fire at Quigley on this particular issue. The message has gone out: Cut Quigley some slack — for now.

Will the issue come up again? It depends. There will need to be additional information brought forward in the ongoing international legal proceedings regarding the matter. If Quigley’s name is linked again to the debacle in Costa Rica, if fresh claims are leveled against Alcatel-Lucent’s corporate culture, or — however unlikely — if he is questioned by any law enforcement authorities — then the Coalition will light a fire under the NBN Co chief again, with relish.

In the meantime, let us remember one thing.

The Coalition has spent the past six months levelling a series of personal attacks on Quigley that have linked the executive’s name in public with charges of corruption and bribery.

They have done so both under the cover of parliamentary privilege, but also in public, through as many mass media channels as they could leverage. Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has repetitively brought the issue up, using every avenue in his power to have Quigley’s personal credibility debated ad infinitum.

And this has been done, despite the fact that no evidence has been presented about any misconduct on Quigley’s part whatsoever; but solely on the basis that he was part of the leadership team in a massive company in which untenable behaviour took place in a tiny, third-world country thousands of kilometres from where he lived.

Quigley’s patience on this matter, and with the politics of the NBN, has been inexhaustible. If the allegations had been made by private citizens and not members of parliament, there is absolutely no doubt that the executive would have sued for defamation by now. It is clear that his reputation has been besmirched, and there are mechanisms under the law to defend oneself in these sort of circumstances.

In the face of Quigley’s stoicism, the Coalition temporarily backed down. However, the fact remains that it has not apologised for its approach to the matter — and likely never will.

This is the arrogance of political life. It is almost always purely tactical — you say whatever you think you can get away with, and do whatever is necessary to get ahead. But sometimes, as in this case, simply walking away from an issue is not enough. If the Coalition would take Government, and implement its own telecommunications policy, it must demonstrate a little more humility.

Ultimately, for a Coalition Government to take Australia’s telecommunications industry forward with vim and vigour, it will need the staff of NBN Co on side. By the time the next election arrives, several millions of Australians will have the NBN connected, and the program must go ahead in one way or another.

No doubt Quigley would resign if the Coalition took Government — and who could blame him? But the hundreds of other NBN Co staff, not to mention the bureaucrats in the Department of Broadband Communications and the Digital Economy, will be looking to a new Communications Minister for guidance. If Malcolm Turnbull or anyone else in the Coalition wants to be effective in setting telecommunications policy in future, they had better start to demonstrate a little more respect for those who will be implementing it.

76 COMMENTS

The one thing I dislike this article is the portraying of Quidley as a saint

For one thing, the trials most likely wouldn’t have been as extensive as they were if Quidley didn’t make numerous statements that he had to backtrack and re-clarify, some of which were embarrassing

This also isn’t really a “new low” in politics, again the Liberal party was doing , this against the Labor party. Quidley himself mentioned that in retrospect, he should have mentioned that the current company he was working in was under investigation for fraud, and its something that obviously did not come up in his “interview”

My impression has been that there was significant distance between Quigley and the allegations that he didn’t realise he should have disclosed them. And I personally don’t think he needed to disclose the issues — they were a long time ago and distant from him personally.

I was talking about the fact that when Quidley was asked relating to matters of the company he worked at, he made numerous incorrect statements which he had to backtrack from which most likely prolonged the debate.

And I personally don’t think he needed to disclose the issues — they were a long time ago and distant from him personally.
At the time he was hired, the company he worked for was still under investigation, and thats the whole reason why this fiasco happened

No, your just taking what I am saying to an extreme. I am just stating that Quidley is no saint (or devil), as I said before he had to backtrack various statements, and that most likely prolonged the whole fiasco longer then normal

First of all it’s QuiGley not QuiDley… sigh… for someone who claims to know ***king everything this and the Senate bloopers makes one laugh (bet your know how to spell Turnbull, Abbott and Menzies though)…

If you are too biased to even see this for what it actually is, especially coming from Turnbull, whose own political supporters still believe he was anything but squeaky clean in his own little scandal, well…

Throwing stones from glass towers aren’t you Comrade? Do you have a problem with the NBN becoming profitable on the backs of porn downloaders everywhere? I’m sure you’re a pure-hearted saint yourself, no?

Honestly, there is standing by a political belief and then there is outright insanity! deteego takes it to the next level and he does so believing that he and the Coalition are completely right and that everyone else is totally wrong.

I make no secret that I am 100% behind the NBN and NBNCo. And I make no secret that I support the Labor Government in it’s implementation as they are addressing an area that has been neglected by a decade of Coalition inaction.

After all Labor walked into Government when the relationship with Telstra was at it’s worst. Labor managed to open dialogue and with the aide of the NBNCo. have managed to get Telstra to sign on the dotted line, to decommission it’s copper network and retail NBN services instead of compete with it.

Honestly, there is standing by a political belief and then there is outright insanity! deteego takes it to the next level and he does so believing that he and the Coalition are completely right and that everyone else is totally wrong.
The coalition has been wrong many times, no political party is perfect

Its just at the moment, the coalition government is miles ahead of the labor government, and it seems many other people share this opinion.

The context of the debate however is the NBN, and political or not, Labor’s NBN is not the correct approach. It involves politics, because its being brought forward completely by a political party, and they are calling all the shots

I make no secret that I am 100% behind the NBN and NBNCo. And I make no secret that I support the Labor Government in it’s implementation as they are addressing an area that has been neglected by a decade of Coalition inaction.
What exactly is the point of this statement

So suddenly, it appears to be an issue that I support coalition for this term, and as you have admitted you fully support Labor. So why exactly is me supporting the coalition “incorrect” and you supporting Labor “correct”?

In fact why are you even bringing it up? Do you have some hate for the coalition party?

After all Labor walked into Government when the relationship with Telstra was at it’s worst. Labor managed to open dialogue and with the aide of the NBNCo. have managed to get Telstra to sign on the dotted line, to decommission it’s copper network and retail NBN services instead of compete with it.
The opening of the dialogue was due to a change in CEO and Telstra being bribed. I bet I can open up dialogue with any company by giving them money

@ deteego, you supporting the Coalition (I’d suggest perpetually – but as you wish, this term) is NOT an issue whatsoever. What is the issue is having the Coalition think for you, instead of thinking for yourself.

Looking at the comments of 4 of you here, imo, that’s exactly what you all do… and as I have been saying for quite sometime, seems a lot of people can now plainly see it too and understand that those 4 people’s incessant FUDulent comments are tainted by political subserviency, rather than any rational NBN opposition, as they are actually anti-Labor comments.

“@ deteego, you supporting the Coalition (I’d suggest perpetually – but as you wish, this term) is NOT an issue whatsoever. What is the issue is having the Coalition think for you, instead of thinking for yourself.”
This claim is false

“Looking at the comments of 4 of you here, imo, that’s exactly what you all do… and as I have been saying for quite sometime, seems a lot of people can now plainly see it too and understand that those 4 people’s incessant FUDulent comments are tainted by political subserviency, rather than any rational NBN opposition, as they are actually anti-Labor comments.”
None of my comments reflect this, unless you have a personal issue against the coalition party.

Labor’s NBN is the PERFECT approach. It guarantees profitability while ensuring that every dollar in subscriber revenue is spent on the network, rather than allowing Telstra to drain $4 billion/year in profit and “investing” it outside of Australia by building out networks in developing countries where it can charge monopolistic prices with little to no regulation.

It certainly does not guarantee profitability, and the promise was to deliver a 7% return on investment so you are also wrong that “every dollar in subscriber revenue is spent on the network”. I’d say you are just making stuff up without the slightest consideration of the facts.

Cant say for sure if the Quigley witch hunt is over but I can say this the coalition are becoming even more irrelevant in the NBN debate and I think even they are beginning to realise this, expect them to change tactics once again, they’ll most likely ignore it and go with carbon tax stuff until the next election lol.

The point being that opposing the NBN is not hurting the Coalition in the polls at all, the pro NBN frenzy refelected in tech web sites like this from tech tyre kickers does not translate as being anyway represenatative of electorate concern with needing HD video conferencing to four points in the home.

There are no “facts” against the viability and economic benefits of a nation-wide FTTH network built and owned by the government. You certainly haven’t shown any. Your incessant cries of “wireless” or “expense” are ridiculously transparent, as is your sidestepping every factual argument thrown your way.

“There are no “facts” against the viability and economic benefits of a nation-wide FTTH network built and owned by the government.”

Well there is plenty, its just you don’t want to read them.

“You certainly haven’t shown any.”

Well he has you just don’t like reading them, or you totally ignore adverse facts about the NBN and FTTH in general as if they don’t exist.

“as is your sidestepping every factual argument thrown your way.”

Coming from you the master of vagueness, avoiding of specific questions, launching personal attacks when you are backed into a corner, which is often and telling outright BS like Telstra creating monopolies in overseas countries with their profits, that statement about someone else is hilarious!

“The point being that opposing the NBN is not hurting the Coalition in the polls at all blah blah blah.”

Welcome to another episode of “Stating the obvious with advocate!” today he points out that elections are usually about more than one issue. What a revelation!

Sorry advocate hate to break the news to you but barring some extraordinary miracle the NBN will be going ahead regardless of what happens at the next election. You’ll just have to get used to it although I have to admit it would be funny to see you and the rest of the crusaders form a mob with pitchforks chanting “we want to keep our copper! want to keep our copper! want to keep our copper!” when it comes to your area.

“Sorry advocate hate to break the news to you but barring some extraordinary miracle the NBN will be going ahead regardless of what happens at the next election. ”

I would like to see evidence of that claim

Polling suggests that Labor would get but raped next election

The current contract with the construction company only lasts 3 years, and that duration is specifically due to the fact that there is a very real risk of coalition going into government and cancelling the NBN. Contracts don’t even need to be cancelled, it will just run out a bit after coalition would get into power (however what happens with NBNCo is going to be a different matter)

I’d also suggest the only way Labor can win the next election is the Abbott factor.

With a real leader, the Coalition would be unstoppable. Because even with Labor at all time lows and Gillard likewise (or close to) Abbott is only ahead of Gillard and still has a greater disapproval 52% than approval 39% rating (according to the figures I could quickly find below)…so WTF!

Again imo, Abbott was placed into the job of leader to protect Turnbull and/or Hockey from annihilation by Rudd, who was (iirc) the most popular PM ever at the time, but… the rest is history.

Rudd fell from grace within months and became so unpopular he was knifed by the assassins and the fill in leader “almost won”… This was over a matter of months, not years…

Just to prove the fickleness of voters and the way things can turn (from the same rag)…

Heres the story now… Labor and Gillard at record lows in the polls, here –

@deteego, your URL suggests Abbott may become and remain the more popular leader, and this may still have no bearing… But not so “IMO”.

We have become little America, with presidential type elections. Leader vs. Leader… yes in the end two party preferred is what determines the actual count, but before that, people (who aren’t minions to one party) relate to a leader. Look at Rudd…

It is only my opinion, but the thing is, although an ardent NBN supporter, I am a swinging voter. A swinging voter who WILL NOT vote for ABBOTT. But I could, with a few simple common sense alterations to policy, vote for Turnbull or maybe Hockey…

IMO the only thing that “could stand” between the Coalition and government is Abbott, and as witnessed by the polls and again Rudd’s fall from grace, all can change in months, not years…!

It is only my opinion, but the thing is, although an ardent NBN supporter, I am a swinging voter. A swinging voter who WILL NOT vote for ABBOTT. But I could, with a few simple common sense alterations to policy, vote for Turnbull or maybe Hockey…
Thats all well and good, but this isn’t a politically (or statistically) accurate statement. The swinging voters are currently inclined to vote for Abbot

Around 70% of Australian votes are actually non swinging (that is they will always vote the same party). The rest of the 30%, majority of them are the so called Howard Battlers, and currently Labor has done little to please that group

As I said, the polling, which is what is statistically significant (and acccurate) says otherwise. In fact I would say the opposite of what you are saying is what is happening, people have started to vote regarding the party and disregarding the leader, that explains why Coalitions 2PP is so high

The chart on the Australian is a direct reference to historical newspoll’s. They didn’t do the polling at all. They just provided a table that has all of the polling results from history and made their own interpretation of it. You can make your own conclusion from such figures if you want

Also, I am not sure what you mean by fickle, but if you look at a graph over time of the polling ever since Gillard got elected, there is a steady decrease for Labor and a steady increase for Liberal. Its not “fickle” at all

deteego… we have exhausted this, especially considering you are egotistically and politically arguing that “my personal circumstances” which form “my personal opinions” are inaccurate – que?

Seriously, read my lips… “I will NEVER vote for Abbott” and looking at the polls there “are” many others like me. His disapproval is still greater than his approval rating. What does that tell you, especially when his party is clearly in the lead (please post further excuses…here)? Argue over pedantics/semantics all you like, but those are MY thoughts and those are the facts which suggest I am well and truly not alone – comprehende`?

Obviously, the Coalition even with Abbott at the helm, are “currently” sitting pretty. But I’d say because the others are considered worse, due in part to an ineffectual Labor team and an incessant but effective negative campaign by Abbott.

All I am saying is, imo, put a better leader in charge of the Coalition and there will be no doubt, unless there is some huge revolt…! I still say, the Abbott factor COULD end up biting the Coalition, which you strangely took offence to and immediately came to Abbott’s defence? Curious thing to do, for one who claims to be sans political association (other than being a mere voter)!

Typically for arguments sake, you present a chart and talk polls, yet you wish to pick and choose which parts of each suit you, and ignore the remainder, rather than judging them across the board, for what they are.

Fickle – as indicated by previous polls (the ones you ignore) less than 4 months ago it was the opposite, with Gillard/Labor leading and Abbott at all time lows… So if you wish to ignore the warnings from actual voters and take comfort from your chart, please do so. But remember, popularity can change quickly, just ask Kev!

Regardless, the chart you supplied is certainly very interesting.

But I find it hypocritical on your part, that you place emphasis on past trends and future assumptions in relation to polling (because the polls indicate a Coalition victory and again, for one who claims no political activity that’s quite an anomaly) but yet you dismiss similar charts, which demonstrate past trends/future projections relating to broadband speeds/data usage, which I’m sure your schooling would have taught you, have been quite accurate and as such, clearly suggest the current NBN proposal the obvious choice.

Sad what politics does to some people’s thought processes and common sense…!

Oh please. The Liberals have no “vision”. They’ve never presented a single draft or business case for their “proposal”. Where are the true estimations of cost, not the white-washed rants of a delusional Shadow Minister? FTTN is extremely expensive and is not a stepping stone to FTTH. AT&T found their FTTN U-verse service was costing around 2/3 per household as much as Verizon’s FTTH “Fios” service. That’s why they stopped and have no viable upgrade path. You have to rebuild the entire network to go from FTTN to FTTH: http://nbnexplained.org/wordpress/technical-points/the-fttn-first-debate/

“The fibre network used to build FTTN will only be useful for FTTP if it’s installed with enough cores to connect each house in the neighbourhood serviced by the pre-FTTP node.

Which is isn’t. It never is. Nobody’s pulling high-density cables into RIM cabinets. Usually 12 cores at most.”

You do realize that Labor for their NBN MKII only provided the plans and details around a month before the election (and the business case came after the election?)

The amount of hypocrisy on this forum is disguising.

The coalition have stated they will release their policy, and its costings at a nearer date to the election, just as Labor did. Furthermore Malcolm Turnbull said that he will stop the NBN immediately and do a CBA to find out the most cost effective way to deliver broadband

“The coalition have stated they will release their policy, and its costings at a nearer date to the election, just as Labor did.”

Well Labor never did, they won the election from Howard based on a RFP process election policy in which private interest groups where invited to submit proposals for a national network, that process felt on its head and all submissions were rejected and the taxpayer funded FTTH rabbit was pulled out of the hat , well AFTER that 2007 election.

So based on that strategy the Coalition can go into the next election announcing one policy and then after they have won they can completely change their mind to something else, just like Labor did.

Yes of course they can, IF those who submit their proposals are not up to scratch… wow what a revelation…

But ffs are you blokes so stupidly biased you do not understand ‘these are politicians” Labor/Lib = politicians they all FOS, just different flavoured ***t…

Your precious Libs lie just as much as the other liars… remember the never ever GST … And the Never ever carbon tax… 2 PM’s 2 different political persuasions… Whether you agree with the outcomes or not they were both lies…!

Have you awoken yet…helloooo!

Seriously, the only thing which cannot be questioned with you guys, is your mindless willing subservience to your political masters… baa…!

Apparently you haven’t been paying attention to the news and are incapable of reading…

“Polling suggests that Labor would get but raped next election”

And??? Are you suggesting that they will get “raped” based on the NBN issue alone? lol.

“risk of coalition going into government and cancelling the NBN. ”

Of course we’ve heard all this before, Tony Rabbitt and his zoo crew chums want to “destroy” the NBN but that is hardly the issue here, they’ve already stated flip-flopping on the idea for obvious reasons. You really think they’ll get many votes based on a “we promise to dismantle the NBN if we get in” diatribe?

Apparently you haven’t been paying attention to the news and are incapable of reading…
I don’t regard your dribble as news

And I would agree with you, I don’t see how anyone could be capable of reading your nonsense

And??? Are you suggesting that they will get “raped” based on the NBN issue alone? lol.
If Labor loses next election, the NBN “dies”, thats all that matters

Of course we’ve heard all this before, Tony Rabbitt and his zoo crew chums want to “destroy” the NBN but that is hardly the issue here, they’ve already stated flip-flopping on the idea for obvious reasons. You really think they’ll get many votes based on a “we promise to dismantle the NBN if we get in” diatribe?”
Yes I do, because they have been saying this for the past year, and their primary, and preffered PM vote, has been steadily increasing. If there was an election now (and yes Abbot’s, and Coalitions stance, is still demolishing the NBN) they would have a landslide victory

There is no evidence whatsoever that Abbots stance on the NBN is actually going to harm him in regards to winning the election, and there is no evidence whatsoever that he will be forced to change his stance on the NBN to win the election (in fact the opposite)

Sounds rich coming from you. Did you miss the one about the Telstra deal?

Yeah and what about the Telstra deal?

There is a clause where if the government changes, Telstra gets compensated

The only nonsense here is in your posts. For your reading issue normally I would suggest an adult literacy course of some kind…
I am still waiting to hear about any evidence the actually supports your claims

Based on the NBN issue alone?

You said that the NBN not being built is a miracle, that is your claim. Here it is again, in bold“Sorry advocate hate to break the news to you but barring some extraordinary miracle the NBN will be going ahead regardless of what happens at the next election. ”

Liberal party says it will cancel the party when they get into power. The liberal party getting into power is highly likely.

Again, I would like to see some evidence of that claim. The Telstra deal does not support that claim (furthermore the deal has to be passed by both ACCC and shareholders).

It seems you are really scraping the barrel to find any sought of straw that sheds positive light on the NBN, however making grandouse claims that it will be a miracle that the NBN won’t be cancelled is typical delusion and far from reality

Do I believe this gospel…no, but this is apparently a quote from Turnbull, which can be taken on face value or looked upon as an early sign of NBN back down…

“The legislation makes it, quite deliberately, extremely difficult – one could say impossible – for the NBN to be sold until the whole network is complete, a date past the lifespan of many of us I suspect, and only after the Communications and Finance Ministers [of the time] have certified [the sale],” Turnbull said.

“Selling the NBN will be harder than privatising Telstra was. That is a very big challenge”…(cont.).

Actually stopping the NBN isn’t an issue at all, in fact it would happen automatically since the contract with Siscar ends just after a coalition government would get voted in

However with things like selling the NBN (recent legislation passed by greens means NBN cannot be sold unless a legislation is passed), reverting the legislation preventing competition and things like that

“You said that the NBN not being built is a miracle, that is your claim. Here it is again, in bold”

Except it’s not a claim. Just stating the situation as it stands. Two things can happen the NBN can either go ahead or not go ahead. A or B. Going ahead is most likely at this point. This stuff isn’t hard to figure out for most of us.

“(furthermore the deal has to be passed by both ACCC and shareholders).”

Another one who loves to state the obvious. Both of things are likely to happen so if they didn’t that would be the miracle you crusaders needed lol.

Except it’s not a claim. Just stating the situation as it stands.
So you regard the NBN being built by a fraction of its target as completion

I thought it was the National Broadband Network

So I guess that means you are happy with around 10% of people having fibre?

Another one who loves to state the obvious. Both of things are likely to happen so if they didn’t that would be the miracle you crusaders needed lol.
No, we just need the coalition to win the election, which is much more likely to happen compared to the alternative ;P

Not me but apparently the coalition would be. Would you be ok with that 10% too?

I wouldn’t have an issue with it, considering there are no other countries of significant size (apart from Japan) that have FTTH higher then that figure

And you’ll be voting for the collation based on the NBN issue and their promise to either halt it or “destroy” it?
Bad policy deserves to be destroyed, and I regard the NBN as a bad policy. Seeing as Telstra will be split regardless (and thats what actually needs to happen) I don’t have any issue with NBN being cancelled at all

Apart from the fact that we are talking talking about percentages here the reason why Australia cant be the “first” is because why?

Thats up to NBN proponents to come up with, your proposing the plan. So far the only plausible reason is for high definition media

Yet you’ll be voting for the coalition based on their patchwork plan? That makes no sense.
The internet is patchwork by design. Its a network of networks. Every internet topology in the world is a collection of what you call patchworks (including Japan)

You are making an issue out of something that is not

If a patchwork design makes no sense to you, then you clearly have little understanding of how the internet developed, and how it is structured

I’m laughing at your ridiculous assertion. The internet was developed in USA and was made possible by the fact that literally everyone had copper phone lines (thanks to decades old projects to build out copper lines to 99% of the population), and that the barrier of entry to providing dial-up service over copper was extremely low. As a result you had 10s of ISPs offering service and driving down prices. American ISPs went from charging dollars per minute of internet access to offering monthly flat-rate unlimited access.

The internet’s explosion in popularity was solely because of its ubiquity. It “evened the playing field” in terms of access to information and generation of content. The exponential growth of companies like Google were made possible by the billions that had access to the internet through copper lines. The success of Facebook can be attributed to the same phenomenon.

Having a “patchwork” NBN relegates all new services to the lowest common denominator, which of course is copper and wireless. Providing client services to the fraction of people with ultra high speed connections would be cost-ineffective, thereby strangling new bandwidth intensive applications and future industries.

*Having a “patchwork” NBN relegates all new services to the lowest common denominator, which of course is copper and wireless.*

bullshit. a “patchwork” infrastructure means you have the appropriate kind of infrastructure servicing the right places that reflects the underlying demand and cost parameters. similarly, the services offered will be tailored according to the infrastructure available. why is it that pay-TV is available on the HFC network even though it’s not offered on the plain copper network? you can shove your “lowest common denominator” argument back up where it popped out from.

*Providing client services to the fraction of people with ultra high speed connections would be cost-ineffective, thereby strangling new bandwidth intensive applications and future industries.*

the most cost-effective manner of stimulating growth in bandwidth-intensive applications is to only deliver it where it makes economic sense to do so. how does pushing fibre to Whoop Whoop, thereby, massively jacking up the average cost of connecting each premise to superfast broadband make high bandwidth apps more viable? it doesn’t – it kills the viability of everything that leverages off a super-expensive fixed-line infrastructure.

Apparently “quid” is slang for an ancient form of money no longer used in Australia. I’ll have to assume he is using it because he wants to return to the good ole days with horse cart buggy and wireless crystal sets… See now you understand why they support the coalitions patchwork network plan…. oh wait what does this have to do with Quigley? I have no idea either I’m afraid :-(

Ah yes, Quigley is so scared of being forced to go back to his old company and get paid an order of magnitude more per year, including bonuses and stock options. Does it occur to you that he doesn’t care? He’s doing this because he truly wants to see a network built out the right way and for the right reasons.

*And this has been done, despite the fact that no evidence has been presented about any misconduct on Quigley’s part whatsoever; but solely on the basis that he was part of the leadership team in a massive company in which untenable behaviour took place in a tiny, third-world country thousands of kilometres from where he lived.*

Alcatel admitted in the non-contested “Agreed Statement” which was part of the DOJ/SEC settlement that there was a systematic practice of bribery through the employment of “sham consultants” which operated in twenty different countries and the payments were routed via an Alcatel subsidiary in Switzerland which acted as a front for the illegal transactions. Quigley tried to falsely portray the Costa Rica affair as simply the actions of rogue employees – this is contradicted by relevations in the “Agreed Statement”.

*In the face of Quigley’s stoicism, the Coalition temporarily backed down. However, the fact remains that it has not apologised for its approach to the matter — and likely never will.*

there’s no reason for the Coalition to apologise – quite the contrary, they did a good job of spotlighting various false representations made by Quigley about the Alcatel corporate bribery affair.

*Ultimately, for a Coalition Government to take Australia’s telecommunications industry forward with vim and vigour, it will need the staff of NBN Co on side. By the time the next election arrives, SEVERAL MILLIONS of Australians will have the NBN connected, and the program must go ahead in one way or another.* (MY BOLD)

Exhibit 1.2 pg 15 of NBNco Corporate Plan:

total # of premises passed (June 2013): 1,717,000
of which FTTP brownfields: 950,000

total # of premises with active service (June 2013): 570,000
of which FTTP brownfields: 260,000

have the projections been updated since the release of the Corporate Plan?

*No doubt Quigley would resign if the Coalition took Government — and who could blame him?*

Quigley – the guy who tried to sell Australian taxpayers a A$50bln white elephant… who would miss him?

*But the hundreds of other NBN Co staff, not to mention the bureaucrats in the Department of Broadband Communications and the Digital Economy, will be looking to a new Communications Minister for guidance. If Malcolm Turnbull or anyone else in the Coalition wants to be effective in setting telecommunications policy in future, they had better start to demonstrate a little more respect for those who will be implementing it.*

or he could just sack all the Conroy cronies and pump in some fresh blood (talent).

I wonder if the coalition will bring back work choices?
(Me thinks they will secretly LOL)
Will the Liberals continue to squander migrants to the wind and tear up any innovative infrastructure that the public screams for ?
The NBN is fast becoming a dead issue for the majority of voters.
Any policy which puts money in voters pockets will be election winning. The polls mean nothing.
It’s been educational and entertaining reading all the comments..

Comments are closed.

Book now available

Written by Delimiter Publisher Renai LeMay, The Frustrated State is the first in-depth book examining of how Australia’s political sector is systematically mismanaging technological change and crushing hopes that our nation will ever take its rightful place globally as a digital powerhouse and home of innovation.

Welcome! We were an energetic and engaged community of Australians who worked with or who were interested in technology -- all sorts of IT professionals, IT managers, CIOs, tech policy-makers and tech enthusiasts.